The difference of opinion between Education Commissioner Duke Albanese and Gov. Angus King over the size of the budget for General Purpose Aid to Education is largely just part of the process of knocking together an overall state budget. But the commissioner’s budget appropriately highlights the need for restoring the state share of education dollars as the majority source of funding.

The commissioner’s presentation to the State Board of Education last week raised two questions about the shape of the education budget: The size of the expected increase — Mr. Albanese recommended 5 percent, which amounts to approximately $30 million; and whether lawmakers are to count in the calculation the last-minute appropriation to GPA from last year’s surplus — doing so would add $17 million, bringing the total GPA to $621 million.

The governor, who has yet to publicly offer a number, is expected to present a slightly lower increase and does not think the last-minute money ought to be counted as part of GPA, so his budget figure may come in $20 million to $25 million less than the commissioner’s. From there, the Legislature will take it and certainly make further changes.

Whether or not Mr. Albanese is right in his assessement of the surplus money, he is to be commended for his strong advocacy. The governor launched an ambitious improvement project for Maine schools a couple of years ago when he created the Learning Results standards; his commissioner is right to try now to secure the funds to pay for it.

The commissioner went further at the State Board of Education meeting, advocating for a change in the school-funding formula that would particularly benefit rural communities. He observed, accurately, that just because a school has fewer students from one year to the next does not necessarily mean that its costs have decreased. When a school system of several hundred students, kindergarten to grade 12, declines by a couple dozen students, the same number of school buildings still have to be open, the same number of teachers and administrators paid and virtually the same level of support services still needed. But the formula doesn’t adequately recognize this.

Both the commissioner and Gov. King have urged a review of this shortcoming in the funding formula. The problem with changing the formula, however, is that legislators automatically check to see how their districts will be affected before deciding whether the proposed change is good state policy. The only practical time to make the change proposed is when a healthy increase in the funding total lets everyone benefit.

Maybe the commissioner knew what he was doing last week with that budget proposal.